The Hindu Editorial Discussion is crucial for UPSC CSE preparation, offering in-depth analysis of current affairs, government policies, and socio-economic issues. It enhances critical thinking, answer-writing skills, and interview preparation by providing diverse perspectives on national and international developments. Regular editorial reading helps aspirants develop a balanced viewpoint, improving their essay writing and General Studies papers.
1. Nuclear energy — dangerous concessions on liability
Context:
The Indian government has proposed amendments to the Atomic Energy Act and the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act in the Union Budget 2025. This move is seen as an effort to appease the United States, which has long opposed India’s liability laws that hold nuclear suppliers accountable in case of an accident. The proposed changes raise concerns about nuclear safety, supplier indemnity, and the economic viability of imported reactors.
Key Points:
- Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010 (CLND Act):
- Holds Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) responsible for accidents.
- Caps operator liability at ₹1,500 crore despite potential damages being much higher.
- Includes a “right of recourse” clause, allowing NPCIL to seek compensation from suppliers in case of defective equipment.
- Proposed Amendments & Concerns:
- Potential removal/dilution of the right of recourse, indemnifying foreign nuclear suppliers.
- Could shift the financial burden of accidents to Indian taxpayers.
- Reduces incentives for suppliers to ensure reactor safety.
- Could weaken India’s legal framework for nuclear accident accountability.
- Historical Precedents of Nuclear Disasters:
- Fukushima (2011): Cost of cleanup estimated at ₹20-46 lakh crore.
- Three Mile Island (1979): Supplier Babcock & Wilcox ignored safety concerns before the accident.
- Bhopal Gas Tragedy (1984): Supreme Court ruling established absolute liability for hazardous industries.
- Impact on India’s Energy Sector:
- High costs of US-based AP1000 reactors ($36.8 billion for 2 reactors in the US).
- Electricity from imported reactors would be several times more expensive than alternatives.
- Small modular reactors (SMRs), such as NuScale, lack economies of scale, making them uneconomical.
- Geopolitical Angle & US Pressure:
- US has lobbied aggressively for changes in India’s liability law.
- US Ambassador Eric Garcetti has pushed Indian leaders to amend the law.
- US nuclear firms like Westinghouse refuse to accept even minimal liability.
- Strategic and Policy Implications for India:
- Amendments could weaken India’s bargaining power in nuclear deals.
- Raises questions about India’s commitment to nuclear safety and citizens’ rights.
- Need to balance energy security, economic viability, and safety concerns.
- The move could face political and public opposition.
Conclusion:
The proposed amendments could benefit foreign nuclear suppliers but compromise India’s nuclear safety framework. While India seeks strategic nuclear partnerships, it must ensure that economic viability, liability, and public safety are not undermined.
2. Budgeting for gender-inclusive ‘Viksit Bharat’
Context:
The Union Budget 2025-26 underscores the government’s commitment to inclusive development, particularly focusing on women-led growth as a critical pillar of Viksit Bharat. The Budget sets ambitious targets, including zero poverty, universal education, full employment, and 70% women’s participation in economic activities by 2047. To achieve this, gender-responsive budgeting has been significantly strengthened, reflecting a whole-of-government approach.
Key Points
1. Gender Budget Allocation:
- Increased to 8.8% of the total Budget (₹4.49 lakh crore) from 6.8% last year.
- 49 ministries allocated funds, including 12 new non-conventional sectors (e.g., railways, shipping, pharmaceuticals).
- Aim: Gender mainstreaming across governance.
2. Women’s Labour Force Participation (FLFPR):
- Increased to 42% in 2023-24 from 33% in 2021-22 (Periodic Labour Force Survey).
- Still lags behind men’s participation at 79%.
- Goal: 70% women’s participation in economic activities by 2047.
3. Employment & Skill Development Schemes:
- ₹1.24 lakh crore allocated (up from ₹1.19 lakh crore).
- 52% of funds directed to women and girls.
- Key schemes:
- Skill India Programme, ESDP, National Skill Training Institutes.
- DAY-NRLM, MGNREGS, PM Employment Generation Programme.
- New schemes: PM Dhan-Dhaanya Krishi Yojana, first-time entrepreneurs’ scheme.
4. Gig Workers & Informal Sector:
- 90% of India’s working women are in the informal sector.
- Formalisation through identity cards and e-Shram registration.
- Challenges: Low wages, job insecurity, lack of benefits (maternity leave, social security).
5. Role of AI & Digital Economy:
- ₹600 crore allocated for gender budget under India AI Mission.
- Establishment of a Centre of Excellence on AI for women’s digital education and employment.
6. Women in Agriculture & Financial Inclusion:
- Simplification of Kisan Credit Card (KCC) norms to include women farmers.
- 20.5% of MSMEs are women-owned, employing 27 million people.
- Unlocking finance: Collateral-free loans, alternative credit scoring, financial literacy.
- Potential: 30 million additional women-owned businesses could create 150-170 million jobs by 2030.
7. Structural Reforms Needed for Viksit Bharat:
- Gender-responsive budgeting should be coupled with social protection and infrastructure investment.
- Shifting social norms and ensuring labour market inclusivity.
- Sustained policy efforts required to reach 70% women’s workforce participation by 2047.
This gender-inclusive budgeting approach strengthens India’s goal of achieving women-led development in the journey towards Viksit Bharat.
3. Averting Engels’ pause: On the AI Action Summit in Paris
Context:
The AI Action Summit in Paris (February 11, 2025) brought together global leaders, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi, to discuss the governance, trust, safety, and equitable access to Artificial Intelligence (AI). India, along with 50+ countries, signed a joint statement emphasizing responsible AI development. The summit also addressed key concerns regarding labour market disruptions, sustainable energy use, and AI-driven economic shifts.
A major focus was preventing an ‘Engels’ pause’—a phase where technology-driven productivity gains benefit firms while real wages stagnate. India’s AI strategy needs proactive policies to mitigate job losses and ensure that AI advancements lead to inclusive economic growth.
Key Points
1. AI and Labour Market Disruptions:
- AI-driven automation may reduce employment opportunities and stagnate wages, especially in sectors like IT and services.
- Engels’ pause: A period where firms benefit from technology while workers face stagnant wages.
- PM’s stance: AI should create new job opportunities, not just efficiency gains.
- Policy measures needed to prevent labour market distress.
2. AI and Energy Sustainability:
- Rising AI energy demand: Data centers consume increasing electricity for AI training.
- Comparative energy production:
- U.S. produces twice as much electricity as India with just a quarter of its population.
- India must ensure AI growth aligns with renewable energy goals.
3. AI’s Economic Viability & India’s Strategy:
- Commercial AI ventures still struggle with high investments and low returns.
- IndiaAI Mission initiatives:
- Subsidized Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) clusters for AI research.
- Funding for India-specific AI models.
- Focus on AI education and skill development.
- Need to retain top AI talent domestically to ensure competitiveness.
4. India’s AI Governance and Global Collaboration:
- India & 50+ countries signed a joint statement on AI governance.
- Ensuring AI follows ethical standards, transparency, and risk mitigation.
- India’s role in shaping global AI norms and policies.
Way Forward:
- Proactive labour policies to counter AI-driven job losses.
- Energy-efficient AI models to reduce environmental impact.
- Investments in AI education and skill training at scale.
- Building AI models suited for Indian needs, balancing innovation with inclusivity.
India must navigate AI’s challenges strategically to harness its full potential without compromising jobs, energy sustainability, or economic stability.
4. Wilful violation: On the Tamil Nadu Governor’s conduct
Context:
The Supreme Court has raised serious concerns over Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi’s handling of state Bills. The key issue revolves around his refusal to grant assent to Bills that were re-passed by the State Assembly, as required under Article 200 of the Constitution. Instead, he referred these Bills to the President, allegedly to bypass his constitutional obligation.
The Governor’s delay in acting on Bills (some pending for 1-2 years) and his selective invocation of procedural objections suggest a deliberate attempt to block legislation. The Union government’s response to this constitutional impasse will be crucial for maintaining federal principles.
Key Points
1. Constitutional Provisions Involved:
- Article 200 (Governor’s Role in Assenting Bills):
- A Governor can grant assent, withhold assent, return a Bill, or reserve it for the President.
- If a Bill is passed again by the Assembly after being returned, the Governor is bound to grant assent.
- Article 201: If a Bill is reserved for the President, the President can either grant or withhold assent.
2. Supreme Court’s Observations:
- The Governor’s act of referring Bills to the President—despite being bound to grant assent after a second passage—is a wilful violation of constitutional duty.
- The Court’s 2023 ruling clarified that Governors must return Bills instead of withholding assent indefinitely.
- The Attorney General’s argument:
- The Bills conflicted with UGC regulations (concerning university vice-chancellor appointments).
- When assent is withheld, the Bill ceases to exist—hence, no obligation to return it.
3. Governor’s Conduct and Federalism Concerns:
- Pattern of delay and obstruction in passing State Bills.
- Possible executive overreach by using the Governor’s office to block State legislation.
- Previous SC interventions questioning whether a Governor can refer a Bill to the President after withholding assent.
4. Impact on Constitutional Governance:
- Undermines federalism and state autonomy by delaying state laws.
- Governor’s role is ceremonial, not an independent authority to block laws indefinitely.
- Need for reforms in the process of gubernatorial assent to prevent misuse.
Way Forward:
- Clear SC ruling on Governor’s discretion in withholding assent.
- Union government must address constitutional concerns regarding Governor’s overreach.
- Possible judicial guidelines to limit delays in gubernatorial assent and ensure accountability.
The case highlights a growing constitutional crisis where Governors are seen as political agents rather than impartial constitutional authorities. The Supreme Court’s verdict could set a precedent for limiting executive overreach in state affairs.
Disclaimer:
This analysis is based on the editorial content published in The Hindu and is intended solely for informational and educational purposes. The views, opinions, and interpretations expressed herein are those of the author of original article. Readers are encouraged to refer to the original article for complete context and to exercise their own judgment while interpreting the analysis. The analysis does not constitute professional advice or endorsement of any political, economic, or social perspective.
Follow Fusion IAS